Case Background
Ross Byer, a Caucasian male, started his career as a police officer for the City of La Palma in May 2022. After completing his initial three-month training, he received a positive six-month evaluation and earned commendations for his investigative skills and teamwork. However, his professional environment shifted when he began working under Sergeant Koh, a Korean American officer.
Cause
Byer alleged that Sergeant Koh created a hostile work environment driven by racial bias. According to the complaint, Koh openly expressed a desire for an "all-Korean police force" and pressured Byer to engage in unethical practices, such as profiling minority suspects and conducting stops without probable cause. When Byer refused to follow these directives, Koh allegedly threatened his employment and issued poor performance evaluations.
Injury
The situation reached a breaking point on June 8, 2023, when Byer felt he had no choice but to resign, a move he characterized as a constructive discharge. He claimed that the City’s actions caused him severe and ongoing emotional distress. Furthermore, Byer alleged that the department and Sergeant Koh actively tried to blacklist him, preventing him from finding comparable work in law enforcement after his departure.
Damages Sought
Byer sought compensation for a variety of losses resulting from the City’s conduct. His demands included:
Past and future lost wages and benefits.
Damages for emotional distress, including mental suffering, anxiety, and humiliation.
Attorneys' fees and litigation costs.
Civil penalties under the Labor Code.
A permanent injunction to prevent the City from committing similar violations in the future.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The legal battle centered on whether the City of La Palma had allowed racial discrimination and retaliation to push a decorated officer out of his job.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Ross Byer
Counsel for Plaintiff: Christian J. Petronelli | Mitchel Vanderpool
Defendant: City of La Palma.
Counsel for Defendant: Elizabeth M. Kessel | Armineh Megrabyan | Martha Cohen
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Byer’s legal team argued that the City violated several California laws. They claimed that the City discriminated against Byer based on his race and color, violating the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). They further asserted that when Byer reported these issues to his captain, the City failed to investigate and instead retaliated against he, eventually forcing him to quit. The complaint also included charges of wrongful termination in violation of public policy and both intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Defense
The City of La Palma issued a general denial of all allegations. Their defense team argued that any actions taken regarding Byer’s employment were based on legitimate, non-discriminatory, and non-retaliatory business reasons. They claimed that Byer’s resignation was not a constructive discharge and that he had failed to exhaust all administrative remedies before filing suit. Additionally, the City maintained that it was immune from certain claims under government code and that Byer had failed to mitigate his own damages.
Jury Verdict
On December 9, 2025, the jury reached a unanimous decision in favor of Ross Byer on all primary counts.
Discrimination and Retaliation
The jury found that the City of La Palma subjected Byer to adverse employment actions and a constructive discharge. They specifically determined that Byer’s race, ethnicity, or national origin was a substantial motivating reason for the City's decisions. The jurors also concluded that Byer’s reporting of discrimination was a substantial factor in the City's retaliatory conduct. Crucially, the jury rejected the City's "mixed-motive" defense, finding that the City would not have taken the same actions based on Byer's job performance alone.
Failure to Prevent Harassment
The jury further ruled that the City failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent the discrimination and retaliation from occurring. They determined that this failure was a substantial factor in causing harm to Byer.
Awarded Damages
The jury awarded Ross Byer a total of $8,400,000.00. The compensation was broken down as follows:
Past Noneconomic Loss: Approximately $3,921,000 for mental suffering, anxiety, and humiliation experienced up to the trial.
Future Noneconomic Loss: $4,480,000 for the ongoing emotional distress and loss of enjoyment of life he is expected to face in the future.
Court documents are available upon request at [email protected]
